2: b bill of rights??? why? | The U.S. Constitution was ratified in 1787 but it was missing something crucial... THE PEOPLES RIGHTS! | There was a proposal of a new constitution with specific rights BUT the Anti-federalists were concerned that it could possibly become dangerous in the event key rights were omitted. So as a compromise a bill of rights was proposed. It was a less jeopardizing solution to the error in our Constitution. | James Madison Guided the Bill of Rights through the new Congress along with the support of Thomas Jefferson.

3: Madison proposed a list of 9 amendments along with 42 separate for congressional consideration | HOW THOUGHTFUL!! | Congress threw out four of Madison's amendments but when the bill came out of the House of Representatives the only changes made to the final 12 amendments was only to its form not the contents.

4: FUN FACT: The original second amendment actually became the 27th in 1992 | The original proposed first amendment addressed the issue of congressional representation but failed to get ratified and so, as a result, it became a dead letter. | Madison wanted the amendments added into the Constitutions text but Congress liked the idea (proposed by Roger Sherman) to append them to the end of the document.

5: During the first 100 years after the bills ratification, it wasn't really implemented in judicial decision making. | The judicial branch view the bill as a limitation on the actions of the national government and not the state government... "IT'S NOT FAIR!!" | The Bill of Rights has had considerably more influence in the 20th century than in the 19th

7: Harmelin v. Michigan (1991) | The case held that a state may sentence someone to a life sentence without the possibility of parole if in the possession of 650 grams of cocaine. Harmelin had contended that the penalty was to harsh for the crime and therefore violated the cruel and unusual punishment of amendment 8. In the end a five-four ruling ended the debate as the supreme court overruled the claim their violation of the 8th amendment.

8: Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition 2002 | The Free Speech Coalition feared that Congresses expanded definition of child pornography could endanger their legitimate activities so they filed a lawsuit. They wanted the prohibition of any image that "appears to be" children having sex and speech the may convey that the image is said activities. their requests were overbroad and vague and had a chilling effect on their legitimate work. The district court disagreed, adding that the overbreadth claim was specious as it was "highly unlikely" that any "adaptations of sexual works like Romeo and Juliet... will be treated as 'criminal contraband.'" The Ninth Circuit reversed, reasoning that the government could not prohibit speech merely because of its tendency to persuade its viewers to engage in illegal activity. The government asked the Supreme Court to review the case, and it agreed, noting that the Ninth Circuit's decision conflicted with the decisions of four other circuit courts of appeals. Ultimately, the Supreme Court agreed with the Ninth Circuit.